Safety and security systems, such as fire alarm systems, that monitor a site are known in the art. However, when multiple faults occur in a safety and security system, it can be a challenge for a user to identify the risks associated with each fault and to prioritize the faults and the work necessary to address each of the faults.
Furthermore, when maintenance work is performed on a safety and security system, a user may be unable to estimate asset liability caused by the failure of the safety and security system. Indeed, when a safety and security system device, such as a sensor device or a video camera, or a zone monitored by a safety and security system is disabled by a user for maintenance, or for any other reason, users are not notified of the maintenance and the costs of assets at risk, and the potential risks involved are not identified by the system or conveyed to users. When maintenance work is completed and a sensor device, video camera, or zone is re-enabled, it is not uncommon for a user to forget to remove precautionary devices, such as protective covers for a smoke detector or sprinkler, an auxiliary power disconnection, an exit area clearance, and the like. Accordingly, the future detection of a safety and security conditions, such as a fire, can fail.
In known systems, when a fault is detected, the fault is reported to a user interface monitored by a user. The user sends a request to a third party vendor to respond to and rectify the fault, but the transmitted request and the response thereto can be based on the user or third party's own assessment of a plurality of factors, including available man power, space, equipment, and the like. Indeed, the user transmitting the request to the third party and the third party responding to the request can base their actions on their own understanding of the monitored site, risk level at the location of the detected fault, assets being protected by the system, available hardware and manpower, or alternate protection available to the fault location. Accordingly, responding to a detected fault provides many opportunities for human error, including manually assessing and improperly downgrading the risks involved. Furthermore, known safety and security systems fail to prioritize high risk faults to facilitate immediate response thereto and rectification thereof by notifying an appropriate user via a medium appropriate for the high risk nature of the fault.
In view of the above, there is a continuing, ongoing need for improved systems and methods.